The imprisonment with prison labor for the accused shall be determined by one year and two months.

However, the above sentence shall be executed for a period of three years from the date this judgment became final and conclusive.

Punishment of the crime

On March 12, 2013, the Defendant concluded a contract for landscaping construction works worth KRW 2.56 billion in total construction cost on the same day by stating that “A” office of “C” corporation operated by the Defendant in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Chungcheongnam-gu, Namcheon-gu, Seoul, would build an apartment of KRW 1,235 households in Nam-gu, Nam-gu, Dong-gu, Dong-gu, E, and would contract for landscaping construction works.”

Since then, around March 14, 2013, the Defendant borrowed money with a thickness of president in the above “C” office (hereinafter “C”) from the victim on March 14, 2013 following the mold, even though the original contract deposit was prepared for the entire contract deposit, it was urgently needed to borrow money with the thickness of president.

If 100 million won is lent, the down payment is expected to be paid to the prop, and if so, the authorization for new construction of apartment house is immediately difficult.

At present, F is selected as a contractor and a contract is concluded.

Therefore, after a month, the victim made a false statement to the effect that the PF funds will be raised, and that the borrowed funds will be repaid without money for two months later.

However, the fact is that when the defendant obtained business approval from the Yan City on October 8, 2013, the defendant was in a state of not obtaining business approval from the competent authorities at the time, and when the F was selected as the contractor on November 22, 2014, the construction was not necessarily decided at the time of the commencement of the PF loan guarantee, and even at the time of completion of the excavation of cultural properties before the implementation of the project, it is impossible to receive the PF loan because all the conditions for receiving the PF loan are not satisfied at the time of the completion of the development on May 2015. In addition, the defendant was in a financial crisis, and the defendant was unable to repay the borrowed money to the victim within two months, and even if he borrowed the money from the damaged person, only part of the money was paid to the victim and the remainder was considered to be used as the office expenses, etc. of the defendant.

After all, the defendant deceivings the victim as above.